[aprssig] New WIDEn-N Paradigm (MAJOR MOD)
Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.eduMon Feb 7 13:47:02 UTC 2005
- Previous message: [aprssig] New WIDEn-N Paradigm (MAJOR MOD)
- Next message: [aprssig] The Ultimate New WIDEn-N Paradigm
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>>> Wes Johnston <aprs at kd4rdb.com> 2/6/05 3:06:58 PM >>> >You are correct in that _if_ every digi used these same >filters (44,55,66,77) then we'd have a decent fix... but... >Now on the other hand, let's consider ...supporting WIDE2-2 >universally... By placing WIDE2-2 and WIDE2-1 and WIDE3-1 >specific callsigns in the UIDIGI list and removing WIDEn-N Actually, this will work, and thanks for pointing it out! In fact it is a great cold turkey way of cutting out the DX QRM instantly untill all users get the message that nothing above WIDE2-2 is "guaranteed everywhere but that larger N's can be used in areas that can afford it... >This makes it an OPT-IN system, the digi owners would >choose the WIDE packet which were not harmful - and >there's a lot fewer of them... Great thinking! Thanks I'll weave that back into the web pages... Bob, WB4APR-- Quoting Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>: > Wes, > What you are missing is that we want ALL digipeaters to > capture and stop at least WIDE5-5, 6-6, 7-7, and then > there is no where that the packets can get into the system, > therefore you wont get any 7-3's into your area either. > Its a big plan. But each digi that switches over, helps out > ALL digis around it... And eventually the network is better. > > Bob > > >>> Wes Johnston <aprs at kd4rdb.com> 2/6/05 8:28:10 AM >>> > Bob... > > I know your recommendations are always grounded in pracitcality. But > until the > TNC manu's come out with firmware that lets us limit UIFLOOD or UITRACE > hop > count (ie only digipeat UIFLOOD < 2-2), this solution is hokey at > best. > > The 3rd recommendation below defies belief... (the others too, but I'm > going to > pick on number 3) > > 1- RELAY, WIDE5-5, WIDE6-6, WIDE7-7 in wilderness areas > 2- RELAY, WIDE4-4, WIDE5-5, WIDE6-6 in rural areas more than 3 hops > from Metro > Areas > 3- RELAY, WIDE3-3, WIDE4-4, WIDE5-5 in populated areas where even 3-3 > is too > much > 4- RELAY, WIDE2-2, WIDE2-1, WIDE3-3 with UIFLOOD and UITRACE OFF in > Very High > Density local area > > I understand that UIDIGI settings take precedence over UIFLOOD > settings. So you > can put a callsign in there with the SSID such as WIDE5-5... and when a > WIDE5-5 > is heard he'd be digipeated using the UIDIGI setting and get one hop > and no > more. But this still does nothing to stop the WIDE5-4 that my > neighbor's digi > just repeated. Or the WIDE7-3 that my neighbor just digipeated that > originated > 350 miles away. I still end up with my local lan flooded with the lids > from > >200 miles away! In order for this plan to work, every digi has to > catch the > WIDE7-7 or WIDE5-5 on the first hop. And if the first digi to hear > WIDE7-7 > doesn't "gobble it up" with a digipeat under the UIDIGI rules (ie > doesn't > decrement N and does set the HID flag), then that packet becomes > WIDE7-6 which > I can't filter out. There are too many permutations - we're limited to > FOUR in > the UIDIGI setting. > > The whole point for me to switching away from WIDEn-n was to segment > the network > becuase we _didn't_ have a way to filter packets based on the value of > "n". I > realize that the SSn-n is still recommended, but I just can't see > supporting > WIDEn-n anymore. My network is working better than ever since the > switch to > SCn-n here. > > If we start digipeating WIDEn-n here, even with the suggested settings, > we'll > end up seeing as much traffic as we used to as the WIDE7-7's and > WIDE5-5's come > rolling in at various stages of 7-6,7-5,7-4,7-3,7-2 or 5-4,5-3,5-2,5-1. > I never > saw any WIDE7-7's locally. I never saw any WIDE5-5's locally... they > were all > WIDE7-1 or 7-3... how would I stop them? Ideally, the digipeaters in > VA would > catch these packets under the UIDIGI setting, but practically speaking, > they > will not have setup their digipeaters to catch them, and will allow > these > network cluttering packets to propagate outward as WIDEn-n's. > > FWIW, the local digi for me is KC4PL and he runs javaaprs which > supports count > limits. It counts all hops in a packet (ie RELAY,WIDE counts as 2 > hops, > RELAY,WIDE5-5 counts as 6 hops) and will not digipeat any packet with > >x > hops(here, x is set for 3 hops). They don't even get one hop.... They > do get > IGATED, but do not propagate on RF. So a trucker passing thru running > WIDE7-7 > gets to the internet as he obviously is trying to do, but does not > damage our > RF network. > > I do really like the idea of giving the WIDE7-7's one hop... so they > emirge from > the digi as WIDE7-7*. This is so much better than budlisting the guy > because > when he isn't digipeated, he'll get angry and up his RF power and get > very > creative with his paths. > > Wes > -- > > > > Quoting Robert Bruninga <bruninga at usna.edu>: > > > After a lot of debate over the last 2 months we have again > > modified the plan for the New n-N Paradigm to an even better > > and simpler design. See the web page: > > > > http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs/fix14439.html > > > > Summary: > > > > WIDEn-N works everywhere, but large N's are traped > > depending on the area. > > WIDE2-2 is guaranteed to work everywhere > > SSn-N is also supported for area use > > ##LNKn-N interstate idea is abandoned > > > > Secondary effects: > > > > TRACE and TRACEn-N are not supported > > WIDEn-N replaces it and is Traceable everywhere > > RELAY,WIDE and WIDE,WIDE are no longer desired > > WIDE may eventually be dropped if this all works. > > > > All digis will include a list of what they support > > in a consistent manner in the Position Text that > > will show up well on mobiles. > > > > This plan even works in the highest density system > > in the USA in the Los Angeles Basin and a test of it > > was initiated there last week. > > > > I have not completely re-editied all of my old WEB > > pages to reflect all thse changes, so if you find > > conflicts, then point me to them so I can fix them. But > > in general, the above plan is what is currently on the > > table. > > > > Thanks > > Bob, Wb4APR > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aprssig mailing list > > aprssig at lists.tapr.org > > https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig > > > >
- Previous message: [aprssig] New WIDEn-N Paradigm (MAJOR MOD)
- Next message: [aprssig] The Ultimate New WIDEn-N Paradigm
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
